click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN2 6
MSNBC 6
MSNBCW 6
CSPAN 3
KNTV (NBC) 2
WRC 2
CNN 1
CNNW 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WHUT (Howard University Television) 1
LANGUAGE
English 32
Search Results 0 to 31 of about 32 (some duplicates have been removed)
on congress to take action to avoid those massive cuts to pentagon spending known as the sequester which kick in march 1st. if march can't pass a big bill, they ought to pass a small bill to delay the sequester for a few more months. house republicans led by john boehner immediately said no way. here we go again. the party of no opposing anything obama wants. we will tell you about that. also tell you the latest on drones and a lot more here on the full court press. but first, let's get the latest. lisa ferguson is here. well, she is not here. she is in los angeles with today's current news update. hi, lisa. good morning. >> close enough. los angeles, d.c. good morning, everyone. the president is in annapolis today after 10:00 this morning and atends the conference at the western annapolis hotel. vice president biden is swearing in john kerry as secretary at state from the state department and then later this evening, he is speaking at the house democratic issues conference in leesberg virginia. he will lay out a renewed plan for combatting climate change
. it is for these reasons that i believe he is the wrong person to lead the pentagon at this perilous and consequential time. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much, senator inhofe. we have two former chairmen of this committee with us to introduce senator hagel. no senator has had two dearer friends or better mentor is that -- mentors than i have had with senators nunn and warner. i want to welcome them back to this committee. i don't have to tell them that they are among dear, dear friends. it is a real treat to welcome you back to the committee. i will call on you, senator nunn, first. i will call you alphabetically. i have no better way to do it. sam? [laughter] sam, welcome back. >> first, for the record, seniority and age are two different things. senator levin, ranking member inhofe, i am honored to join my friend john warner in presenting chuck hagel to the committee and recommending that chuck be confirmed as our secretary of defense. i think it is worth noting that 68 years ago this month, john warner and listed in the u.s. -- enlisted in the u.s. navy to fight in world war ii. that was
to start with a washington battle on full display this week when the president's pick to head the pentagon, former republican senator chuck hagel, came under fire from members of his own party during a very contentious confirmation hearing. >> name one person in your opinion who's intimidated by the israeli lobby in the united states senate. >> are we right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. >> senator hagel, please answer the question i asked. today, do you think unilateral sanctions would be a bad idea? >> all this raising questions about how effective chuck hagel will be if confirmed as secretary of defense. earlier this weekend, i sat down for a rare joint interview with the top military leadership the outgoing secretary f defense leon panetta and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff general martin dempsey. >>> secretary panetta, welcome back to "meet the press." general dempsey, welcome. let me start with the man that is poised to take your place. he underwent on thursday a pretty tough round of questioning. he seemed to struggle with a lot of the answers. of cou
effective leader at the pentagon. john brennan is somebody i worked with the at the director of cia and continued to work with in this capacity. i found him to be responsible about how we can effectively conduct operations again al qaeda and against those that would attack this country. he is -- as somebody said, a straight shooter. somebody who, you know, gives you his best opinion, he doesn't play games. he is somebody who i think, you know, can honestly represent the best protection in this country in that job. >> thank you very much. i want to thank you for your forthright comments today about the sequester. ironically, as i take some notes what you said and in the statement. it appears as of today the greatest threat to american national security is the united states congress. thank you, mr. secretary. thank you, senator. senator nelson. after senator nelson, the first round will be over. there may be a number of us that want a few minutes on the second round. you have been here for about three hours and you may need a fife or ten minute break. do you want that immediately foll
of the events of the events in benghazi. there were a series of meetings in the pentagon for expanding the department of defense's response as well as to prepare for the potential outbreak of further violence throughout the region. during these meetings, secretary panetta authorized a number of deployments. i hope that secretary panetta and the chairman will provide the committee with detail on the circumstances that led them to these decisions. since september, there's been a great deal of focus on the supporting role that the marine corps guards played -- play in many u.s. diplomatic missions abroad. the marine corps did not have an lament in again-- in benghazi. the committee will be closely monitoring the use of these marines. our fiscal year 2013 national defense authorization act that requires the secretary of defense to conduct an assessment of the mission of the marine security guard program, whether it should be expanded and to report to congress on the results of this review. more immediately, the provision requires the secretary to develop a plan to increase the number of ma
that came out recently. it did suggest the pentagon is pushing the pentagon that would only keep 8000 troops in afghanistan. i know that general austin, you weren't a part of the process so far, but can you support a plan that was scheduled withdraws troops in advance? you know, we're looking at withdraws troops in afghanistan and according to this article from a passing down to 1000 within a short period of time, i have questions if we can even maintain our mission, let alone complete the mission. how can you make decisions on troop withdraw when sec previously, so much depends on the ground, what the government is doing, what variability eyes up to that point. how would you approach a proposal like that? >> i certainly would first really work hard to make sure i fully understood with the leadership wanted to get done moving into the future. certainly my advice is the commander on the ground or commander central command would provide my advice based upon breaking the security forces are and the conditions in theater and what i think we need to do to move forward to make sure we maintain the
your perspective on the pentagon's role in securing our embassies? we just had a near suicide attack, if you will, suicide bomber, at an embassy in turkey just last week. what can be done more than what has been done now? >> the important things to do are first of all you've got to build up the host country capacity. in the end, these embassies do depend on host country, the details that provide security. so you've got to try to develop that. >> this shouldn't be more marines? >> no, no. let me get the rest of the part of it. you have to harden these embassies as much as possible. and third, we have been working with the ste department to determine whether additional marines ought to be assigned to that area. and in the end, the final alternative is our ability to respond in having our troops in a position where they can respond quickly. but i have to tell you, a lot of that still is dependent on whether intelligence tells us that we've got a big problem, and gives us enough warning so that we can get to the place to respond. >> did you have enough time to get there in time? >> no. >
effect. the pentagon needs a seasoned leader to diplomat these cuts, cuts for which an overwhelmingly majority of republicans in congress voted. the so-called sequester, mr. president, was supported by 174 republicans in the house of representatives, 28 republicans here in the senate, 60% and 75% of the two republican bodies in this country. we have a balanced proposal to replace those across-the-board cuts for this year with smart spending reductions which must continue, a measure to close corporate tax loopholes and wasteful subsidies. and revenue from the wealthiest among us, americans making millions of dollars each year. it's critical that the republicans and democrats come together to find a balanced way to avert these drastic cuts. the consequence of the so-called sequester cuts are real not only for national defense but for millions of american families and businesses alike. three-quarters of a million jobs, 750,000 jobs, mr. president, are at stake. across the country tens of thousands of teachers, including thousands of workers with disabled children would be laid off. 70,00
coming out of the pentagon. one i was looking up now because i wanted to remember the numbers, and that was that the pentagon is beefing up cybersecurity forces, taking it from 900 to 4000 and putting a few billion dollars into it. the other one that is being beefed up in these times of budgetary constraints are the special forces. tom, would you talk about that generally? if you would talk about that in a broad nature and then we will come over to the nonexistent challenge that faces in asia. >> i will try to be brief. these are certainly needed and are believed to exploit, you know, this is pretty critical. but it is not qualitatively different from other forms of intelligence gathering or attempts by propaganda or by the military were a strategic situation. the special operations forces, to some degree in, is understandable. but as fred alluded to, we must direct action to magically appear and sustain themselves. if you have seen "zero dark thirty", it's a great picture of how the intelligence went and then the heroine appears at this brown looking base in afghanistan and a
for the pentagon and cia unless the white house stops what he calls stone walling. i'm john roberts. hour number two of america's news headquarters live from the nation's capital starts right now. let's go to steve centanni who has been following the story of senator graham. good afternoon. >> good afternoon, john. talk this morning that there was talk on the is sunday talk shows that two important are nominations can be held up until the white house answers more questions about benghazi. during the attack in benghazi senator lindsey graham wants to know whether the president reached out personally to libyan leaders. he said the nomination of chuck hagel and john brennan could be side tracked until senators get the answers they want. while stopping short of supporting a filibuster graham has serious concerns about whether the president did enough to stop that attack that killed four americans. >> i do believe if he had picked up the phone, called the libyan government, these folks could have is gotten out of the airport to the annex and the last two guys may very well be alive and if he did cal
gives us an accounting. what did the president do? >> the pentagon has announced an expansion of benefits offered to gay and lesbian couples. members of the military in same- sex relationships will receive full access to base facilities and groups, as well as joint assignments. but a number of benefits will still be denied, including health-insurance coverage and on base housing. those restrictions are expected to remain in place until the 1996 defense of marriage act is fully repealed. a federal judge has overturned a state law in arizona barring funding for the reproductive services group planned parenthood. the law banned the use of public funds by state or local government to contract with the organization that provides abortions as one of its services. in his ruling, u.s. district judge neil wake found the law unlawfully denies medicaid recipients the right to choose a medical services. in a statement, planned parenthood of arizona said -- and those are some of the headlines. this is "democracy now!," democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. looking at
to vote today on hagel's nomination to head the pentagon, but that vote has been postponed after republicans said they hadn't received sufficient information about hagel's financial records and specifically about any payments he's received from foreign sources. that's an odd hurdle given that republicans never seem concerned about foreign revenue sources when it came to nominees from george w. bush. one democratic official working on the hagel nomination told politico, quote, what they're asking is unprecedented, and it's clear that it's information that he's unable to provide. hagel says he can't provide it because it would violate confidentiality of the boards that he serves on. of course, critics say this is about more than incomplete financial records. so why are republicans really holding up hagel's nomination? aaron david miller is vice president for new initiatives at the woodrow wilson center. he has served as an adviser on the middle east to both democratic and republican secretaries of state. and joe klein is a columnist for "time" magazine. gentlemen, buzz feed pointed
've seen two budget-related announcements coming out of the pentagon. one, i was looking up just now because i was trying to remember the numbers, and that is that the pentagon is beefing up its cybersecurity force, taking it from 900 to 4,000 and putting a few billion dollars into it. the other one that is apparently being beefed up in these times of budgetary constraints are the special forces. tom, would you just talk about that generally and then, fred, if you would talk about that not just in afghanistan, but in the broader battle and the nature of it, and then we'll come over to publish shah and the non-- membership shah and the nonexistent challenge that faces us in asia. [laughter] >> i'll try to be brief, dani. look, these new capabilities, you know, cyber operations or whatever you want to call them are certainly necessary and needed, and our ability to exploit, you know, the electromagnetic spectrum configured as the internet is, you know, pretty critical. but it's not qualitatively different from other forms of intelligence gathering or, you know, attempts to either by pr
to take a closer look at how that hostage situation was resolved. let's bring in our pentagon correspondent, chris lawrence. he's joining us on the very sophisticated operation that freed that little boy and what similar operations could look like in years ahead. chris, what are you seeing? >> reporter: yeah, wolf. we're now learning that the fbi used drones likely provided from the u.s. military to keep around the clock surveillance on that particular bunker. that coming from former fbi official tom fuentes who has been talking to his sources. the future and what the fbi may be able to do down the line goes way beyond what was done here. >> reporter: a little boy barricaded in a bunker with a killer. as the crisis stretched into a seventh day, an fbi hostage rescue team practiced how to save him. law enforcement sources now say the fbi built a mockup of the bunker and trained on how they'd go in. but how would they know what was happening below? a law enforcement source tells cnn authorities managed to slip a camera into the hideout. >> we're going to try to introduce microph
of veterans who are entitled to their health care by causing the pentagon possibly to have to reduce or eliminate tricare funding. that's just unconscionable to me. >> host: on the issue of blame that gregory kind of gets into, washington post poll out today asked about a thousand people about where they would assign blame in this sequester issue. 45% assigning it to congressional republicans, 32% to the president, another 13% assigned it equally between the two. about five more minutes of your calls, and we'll be back to the u.s. senate at 2:15 eastern. in california, rodney's on our democrats' line. >> caller: yes. i question the legality of the sequester agreement, because to my understanding sequester is to hold property by judicial authority. the property we're talking about here is the taxpayers' money. since congress has no judicial judicial -- since congress is not a judicial branch of the government with nor do they have judicial power, i don't understand how could they even implement the sequester? >> host: here's a tweet that says the sequester was obama's idea, but it bac
Search Results 0 to 31 of about 32 (some duplicates have been removed)